Newton Joseph

WITH TEARS IN MY EYES DO I WRITE THIS PAPER
By Newton Joseph
I was watching a very disturbing program on television last night. I missed the
first part of the program that identified the state that was holding a referendum on the
pros and cons of the rights of homosexuals to be safe from discrimination and
persecution in the public sector.
I think it is criminal to put to a vote that which every American is entitled to -
protection from discrimination in this "home of the free" that our National Anthem
promises. I also see as criminal that allows certain emotionally charged issues, such as
abortion, assisted suicide and the rights of homosexuals to be put to a vote. No one
should have the right to dictate what others should do in personal decisions of their
body.
If you are born in America you are automatically a citizen. The fact we are born
here in America should also give us our inalienable rights as citizens.
I think it criminal to put to the vote certain issues where religion can influence
their parishioners to vote as a block human rights issues. I find it cruel to let the voting
public decide whether a group that is hated should decide the fate of these very people.
Those who were interviewed as opposed to Gay rights are by and large are made
up of the 47% of our population who show low levels of literacy.
One would hope if you are going to vote on an important issue one would be
knowledgeable about what you are voting for. Not true, for those who oppose Gay
rights (it's still people's rights), it is not only low levels of literacy but also low levels of
comprehension. One hears the most stupid and ignorant notions about homosexuality.
The most frequently repeated said as a credo "We don't want our children to learn how
to be homosexual."
Who opposes compassion toward those who are different? Orthodox religions in
general and the fount of Christian love, Christian Fundamentalism, and the United States
military.
I no longer remember who said, religion can flourish without a God, but it can't
without a devil. For 87 years Christianity was flagellating the devil "Godless
communism." Now they have a new devil homosexuals.

Starboy

I agree, it should never have been put to a vote. It is anti-freedom. One day the shoe will be on the other foot and the voting will be about Christians. If Christians think they have the right to vote on removing freedoms from those that do not share their beliefs then they have now set the precident for others. Christian better hope that the day never comes when they are a minority.

Starboy

abe smith

Just reiterating an alleged statement by A. Lincoln: "Those who would deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves." or something approximating that if it's not verbatim.

EDIT: Don't cry, Newton J. We queers , most of us who are still alive anyway, have had lots of practice and we're used to it. you know: "what doesn't kill you makes you stronger." I saw that on a T-shirt a year or two ago.

breathilizer

On this issue, I always ask people, "Did we put women's rights to a vote?"

Black rights to a vote?

Black freedom to a vote?

NO!

We fought for what was just, damnit. Of course it would have benefited the overall good of this country to keep slavery legal. We were prospering beyong belief thanks to slavery. But freedom of the individual is what this country stands for. That's why criminals have rights.

Oh boo fuckin hoo... "They're going to make my marriage less important." Bullshit! The only person that can make your marriage less important is your bitch ass!!! Maybe the government should have thought twice before allowing marriage to be a legal issue to begin with. Maybe they shouldn't have allowed it to cripple our justice system. Maybe they should have left marriage to bind two poeple together by trust and devotion rather than a piece of paper. Gays didn't ruin marriage. Straights ruined marriage. And they ruined it a long fuckin time ago. Let gays get married, or ban legal marriages altogether. Leave it up to the individual couples and/or the individual churches to decide.

jenergy

Breathilizer, you are fuckin funny. And fuckin right. I get pretty riled about the whole "gay marriage will threaten the sanctity of marriage" argument as well. Um, hello? Happen to notice that the divorce rate in this country is FIFTY FUCKING PERCENT? And the rate of people who "cheat" on their spouses is AT LEAST that. Sanctity of marriage my ass! What the fuck.

One thing that does keep my head up, tho - I heard someone say something like in 20 years it will be as laughable to us that we tried to prohibit same-sex marriage as it is laughable now that we once tried to prohibit interracial marriage. I find some probability and, therefore, comfort in that. These things have a way of coming around... many people see queer rights as sort of the "last frontier" in the equal rights struggle in America. We'll see... Keep yer heads up, boyz and girlz. And keep doin' whoever you want.

Yahzi

Well, actually, yes we did. Women were given the right to vote by an act of Congress, not by an act of any court.

In fact, the entire thing came down to one vote - a young Tennesee legislator (his first term, I think). He was expected to vote against it, but surprised everyone by voting for it, because he said he had talked to his mother, and she had told him she knew he would do what was right for women.

jenergy

See, but then the vote was whether women should have the SAME rights as MEN, and now it's whether queers should have the SAME rights as STRAIGHTS. And therein lies the problem. How about should ALL humans have the same rights, period? Why all this catch-up? Now that THIS group of society has a certain privalege, should we extend it to the other sectors of society as well? Gimme a break. It's like we're redefining what constitutes a human. Which is bullshit. If one human has a certain right, so should the next. I don't care what color they got, what bits they got, or who they got in bed at home. Honestly. Intellectually insulting, it is.

BDS

Well, I have nothing against gay rights. But let's at least be reasonably honest, straightforward and accurate as to how we discuss the matter. Gay people have the same rights as other people in this country right now. There's no law saying, "Gay people can't get married." Gay people often do get married, I believe. It's just that men aren't allowed to marry men, and women aren't allowed to marry women. This stricture applies equally to everyone, whether gay, or straight.

Whether this is fair and just is open to question. However, it is not accurate to state that gay people do not have the same rights as straight people. They do. In this regard, the gay rights movement is quite different from the women's rights movement or the black rights movement. Those movements actually were fighting against discrimination. The gay rights movement is not. Instead it is fighting against laws which, while not discriminitory (they apply to all people equally) define certain behaviors generally associated with homosexuality (such as marrying same-sex partners, or engaging in same-sex sex) as illegal.

Megatron

Six in one hand, half-dozen in the other, as far as I'm concerned. Either way, law is interfering with what should be considered as basic human rights.

Example: Women voting was once just as illegal an activity as same-sex marriage. Law interfered with human rights, and they changed the law.

How's this any different?

Starboy

You could state it as you have or you could state it as people should have the right to marry whom they wish. Heteros happen to like the opposite sex, so they have no restrictions, homo's happen to like the same sex and they have a restriction. If heteros think they should stop homos from marrying then I think homos should be able to stop heteros from marrying otherwise everybody should just mind their own business.

Starboy